Ok I went to the local camera store again and I need a NON sales person's advice. What am I giving up by going to the Canon T1i over the 50D. I have had fours sales people say that one or the other was what they would recommend, not that everyone here has the same opinion, but you are not selling them. HELP!

The best advice that anyone will ever give you is to head to a camera store or even just harvey norman/domayne (with a decent camera range) and have a good feel/play with main dslrs cameras on offer you'll know pretty fast whether you like the camera or not, I'm currently looking into the entry level DSLR stuff myself...mainly because i want much better wakeboarding photos.
Anyway, been asking around, reading a fair bit, and what i have basically come to the conclusion of is that they are all great cameras..the canon, sony, nikon etc. etc. Unlike some P&S where there are some really crap ones etc, i think what ever you end up purchasing you will be happy with.

Joining the conversation a bit late but I thought it might be useful to add a few points. Sports photography is as much about the lens as it is about the camera. A T1i with 70-200 f4 will outperform a 50d with 55-250. The L lens is sharper and focuses much faster. Of course, 200mm may not be the correct focal length - it's fine for smalle fields but 200mm is woefully short for full field soccer. If it's full field in poor lighting you need to step up to the $1100 Sigma 100-300 f4.

The 50d focus system is BETTER than t1i but I wouldn't go so far as to say MUCH BETTER.

Same with family photos - T1i with external flash will help you produce better photos than 50d with built-in flash.

Also realize the weather sealing on the 50d is only good if the lens you use on it is sealed - kit lenses aren't. You basically need L lenses to get the weather sealing (a nice idea by Pentax is the inclusion of sealing in consumer lenses).

Don't get me wrong - the 50d is definitely the better camera. But, you also have to look at it from a cost-benefit. If you can afford the external flash, appropriate sports lens AND the 50d then go for it. If you can't, you might be better served to save $$ on the body and get a better lens/flash with the T1i.

And yes, I do happen to shoot soccer (as well as other sports) so I speak from hands-on experience.

Thanks John, I have been heading in the same direction thought wise in the last day or so. My kids are still small so it is not a full field yet, so I am thinking of the 70-200 L lens, although I like the IS feature on the 70-300. Then as the kids get older and the fields get bigger, stepping up to a longer lens. As far as a kit lens it will be an indoor lens.

The 70-300 is a very nice lens and very sharp for a consumer grade lens. But the USM in that lens is NOT the same as the USM in the 70-200 f4. The 300 uses micro-USM and the 200 uses Ring USM - two different motors. The 200 is much faster to focus - it's also much better build quality. Additionally, in heavy overcast conditions you'll find an f5.6 lens will hunt more in focusing than the f4 will. And, not all sports are equal - a sport like soccer you're constantly focusing so the focus speed differences will really start to show.

If it were just a general purpose use I would suggest the 70-300, but with sports the 70-200 f4 is a much better buy IMO. Lack of IS isn't an issue in sports at this focal length - you'll be shooting at 1/400 or better so the 70-200 should easily be hand-holdable.

Generally, the lenses that try to be "everything" to people end up being not all that good at anything. And a lot of what you "need" will depend on what you want to shoot, on a side note, the canon, nikon and sony zeiss lenses are manufactured by cosina who still produce bessa R, a rangefinder type of camera. Since the lens is mounted so close to the film (no mirror), the image quality is amazing almost leica, you like to take portraits as well as small things, look into a 60mm macro lens. This translates into a 90mm equivalent and this is the classic portrait length.